Where I live in Canada, there's careless driving and dangerous driving. Dangerous driving is in the criminal code. Careless driving is a citation akin to speeding.
I've seen courts grant an exception from a license suspension, for normal (but a suspendable amount of) citations such as speeding or something of that ilk.
Those drivers licenses have special wording on them, that indicate the person may only drive to and from work, and often has the address the person has to drive to and from.
However I've also seen contractors allowed to drive to and from job sites, and directly home.
This is in a province of Canada, and dangerous driving or alcohol use, would invalidate that ability to get an exception.
This driver with the Waymo sounds like dangerous driving.
Unclear if in this US State the situation is similar.
I don't know what the parent poster means, but if you look at how LLMs are trained, and how it's trained on human communication, you should find it interesting that humans often correct themselves. They also often create facts out of nowhere, and do this crazy thing called dreaming.
If you're an LLM trying to symbolically emulate human behavior, especially when coding, you're going to see git commits, where people write a bunch of code and then go, oh wait, I should fix that!
From the perspective of an outside observer, making mistakes, and then correcting the mistakes, is how you code.
In fact, an outside observer might think that this is how you teach people to code. You make a mistake, then you say, oh, here's the mistake I made, and here's why, and then you fix it.
So I think true emergent behavior will be demonstrated, when an LLM says "Hey wait a minute! They're actually making real mistakes, and they're actually correcting, it's them not on purpose?!", and then stops hallucinating, and stops making mistakes as it codes.
The same is true of bug trackers. You submit a bug request and you often have a patch. Then people discuss it. From a MLM's perspective, you're supposed to write poor code, or code that's not perfect, and then have a conversation.
If I had the resources to train a large-scale LLM, I would clone, for example, GitHub. I would then remove everything where people are fixing broken code.
The outcome would be very interesting.
I've been looking at ways to make enhanced long-term memory stores for LLMs, and there's lots of problems with shifting symbolic relationships if you do it wrong, but definitely once there's true long-term memory, and adaptive behavio,r I think that's the only way you're going to get true real emergent behavior.
In general, I completely agree with you. Personally, as a human: I have fallible memory, beliefs that are not as sound as I may believe, and all of those notwithstanding, I may not correctly reason, even if my "inputs" were perfect. Let's not even get into cognitive biases, etc. I am acutely aware of my, and other humans' fallibilities.
I think when people are irritated by the "hallucination" aspect of LLMs, they are often running into something of a slightly different nature. I mean, firstly, there seems to be a higher-than-normal ratio of these "little mistakes". And secondly, there are some pretty odd ones - e.g. in my team, Claude regularly just straight up makes up Jira ticket numbers, and then refers to them with high confidence. I guess what I'm saying is that a human would probably not just make up an id, and run with it (they may be off by one, or mix two up, etc). In my opinion, these can be successfully treated, but I guess you can never fully eliminate the tendency that irks people.
In Norway, as an act of sensibility and kindness, prior to WWII, registers were kept at all town halls as to your religion. The point was, people wanted to be buried in the proper cemetery. It was a plus, people registered willingly.
Then the Nazis rolled in. And you can imagine what happened with those registers.
So it doesn't even have to be about your own government. And with digital access being a world away, it can indeed be a threat.
In the Netherlands the Nazis were able to exterminate Jews much more thoroughly than they had in Germany, because the Netherlands kept such meticulous records of the name and address of every Jew.
And everyone else, but the Nazis were after the Jews.
there's no telling what the Google-of-tomorrow will do.
This is true and even vastly understated. Google is like the Walter White of companies. Starts out innocent, turned into a monster, everyone around him astonished at the dark, depraved change.
So if one thinks "nah, Google wouldn't do that", I have a bridge to sell you...
The toothbrush analogy is weird, and untrue in most cases. And regardless, just one time stepping in crap, would make up for a lifetime of a few molecules hitting a brush at random intervals.
And of course, toothpaste is a cleaner, so it's not relevant.
But I find this all amusing, because wherever you take your shoes off? That's where all this supposed crap sits from all these shoes left outside. Which means you are walking in your socks in that area, after shoe removal, and entering the house.
So unless you levitate out of that area, your feet are still covered in this supposed crap.
The shoe rule in Japan stems from damaging floors. And checking your feet, shoes or not, is just prudent. But your feet or clean looking shoes?
How much time have you spent in Japan? The bare foot never touches the genkan floor. It's alarming to do so.
Since you can't imagine it, you could consider looking up some videos of their use before mocking what you consider a fantastical impossibility. In fact it's so easy that children and the elderly succeed at it.
The living area is usually elevated and so you can simply sit down, take off your shoes, and easily change into slippers that are ready at the edge of the living area. Or, one simply steps out your shoes (easy enough at least with sneakers) and to the living area. Easy to do unless one is infirm.
No, you actually step out of your shoes an up to a wooden platform which shoes never trod. And yes, the top and even many middle level dining establishments in Japan actually do require guests to leave their street shoes in an entry way, called a Genkan.
Nobody steps with their socks onto shoe trodden surface. It's not a complicated but of geometry, you loosen your foot in the shoes to make them ready for stepping out from, then step up onto a raised and dirt free platform, then if you have good manners, turn around, lower yourself, and use one hand to collect and turn your shoes so that they are not in the direct line of traffic and are facing away from the house, so that one may step into them from the wooden platform without needing to step backwards as you exit. This is amazingly simple, done by literally millions of people every single day, multiple times, and has been this way for centuries in all kinds of weather and many styles of shoes.
There is no dirt tracked in on your socks, there may be some 'stepping on the top of your own shoes' if you are in a rush and clumsy or a child. But grown ups rarely have much difficulty with this unless they are visiting from somewhere else and cannot be observant. Nearly every doorway in the country also has a handy long handled shoehorn to ease the donning of your shoes without requiring a seat. Community centers and elderly homes and some households with elderly residents will also have a small stool that is at an oblique angle between the 'dirty' shoe level and the clean wooden platform, allowing one to sit and take off shoes, then swivel without putting feet onto filth and stand again in the clean.
I'm frankly astonished at the seemingly purposeful denseness of comprehension for a simple act of cleanliness. The 'filth will make us stronger' approach reminds me of the historical writings of the 10th-century Arab diplomat Ahmad ibn Fadlan, who chronicled the Volga Vikings (Rus') and was the inspiration for the 'Viking morning bowl' scene from the movie The 13th Warrior. Just 'Ewww'
The toothbrush is a moot point if you have a separate be bathroom and toilet. If they are combined the spread of fecal particles is curbed by flushing the toilet with closed lid. And in the end the toothbrush is flushed before using and then coated with toothpaste, which often contains detergents and microbial agenda, and which is finally flushed out.
I don't think you can conclude from that incident that all soap is always contaminated. And even if it's not perfectly clean, in the end ist's all flushed away.
I don't really get what your point is. Are you regularly eating from the pedestrian way?
My point was that you seemed incredibly positive that Japan houses o'clean, and the rest of the world is as apes, in caves, picking parasites off of each others backs.
This obsession with shoes, doesn't cover the fly droppings, the dirt upon clothing, and the fact that your body is always covered in bacteria, your gut filled with bacteria, your lunch covered in it if you ever eat fresh greens, you will die without bacteria.
I'm not suggesting you walk around with dirty shoes, that's silly. Yet I feel you are a city dweller, because the world is made of dirt, and a rural farm worker spends all day in it.
To no harm to the worker.
Dirt is natural. Concrete is not.
So my point was just, you seemed a little upset at dirt.
I just don't get why you treat this as something super complicated. There is street and nature level dirt which contains an unknowable degree of contamination that can be unambiguously bad for you if you ingest it, no matter what that BBC article says, and the inside areas where people eat and sleep. The vast majority of cultures prefer to maintain that separation and to maintain a considerably higher level of cleanliness in the living areas, no matter if it's not at semiconductor fab level.
Specific to Japanese culture is just that they prefer to sit at low tables and to sleep on the ground on duvets; it should be easy to see why they want less dirt on the ground than other cultures.
naishoya was fairly damning of all other methods of living, so naturally I'll be quite overt in my response. And almost everyone was a farmer until the last 100+ years. The only way to generate enough food, without machinery, was for all to take part in its creation.
People were more used to having hands in dirt. That doesn't mean unclean, but I do find all city dwellers more "fussy" about dirt. They take traditions made for pragmatism (keep dirt off the floor, eg tidiness), and evolve it to fussiness(eg, contaminated).
Strange to make such assumptions about my perspectives.
I was simply explaining a foreign culture where removing shoes when coming indoors, and In confused that somehow my familiarity with these traditions is somehow indicative of my life experience or familiarity with microbes. Quite strange indeed. Lets clarify these assumptions.
In fact I was raised in a ranching and dairy household with over 600 head of beef at the dairy, and about 1600 head of beef at the ranch, each of which was owned or managed in various stages by my two grandfathers. Ihave previously lived for a few months less than a full decade in the middle of actual jungle in one of the rainiest locations on the planet without any infrastructure - literally a mile from the nearest paved road, and 3/4 of a mile from the closest vehicular access point with long periods of the year being closed off from that by high water on both sides. No power lines, no water lines, and out of the reach of cell service, so gasp, no internet!
During that time my wife and cared for over twenty goats and about a six pigs. We did all of our laundry by hand with a cranked wringer and buckets and lived principally off of what we could grow, harvest from the jungle, or milk from the goats and did nearly all of our cooking with self harvested wood, a mix of guava, eucalyptus, and mesquite/locust. In those years I have shoveled literally metric tons of goat manure out of sheds built from recycled building materials, one of which incorporated lumber from the shipping of mirror segments to the Keck telescope. < dakine when stay read dis, you know.
As for microbiome knowledge, I have made a living at times from my skills as a microbiologist. I have designed, built and used laminar flow hoods and sterile glove boxes for the isolation and identification of lambic brewing strains for award winning beer produced by two different local microbreweries, have prepared mushroom spore and tissue cultures in agar and liquid media, have cultured cheese and meat preserving lactic cultures (the dusty white wrapping on many different sausage varieties are examples of these lactic cultures) and to make cultures for lactic fermented pickles and kimchi intended as farmers markets and restaurant products with appropriate safety testing which has included sequencing, PCR and gel electrophoresis techniques. I routinely start sourdough cultures for home use and to share, and yesterday started a live ferment chili salsa that will be ready for probiotic consumption in about a week. I'm away from my home kitchen at the moment, but my kombucha polycultures are at a friends house, and my dry aged lactic cultured wild boar leg quarter is hangin at another friends farm awaiting my return.
I have also produced antifungal and antibacterial fungal metabolic products for veterinary use, and have collected, cultured, and sequenced coliform specimens from near shore runoff for submission to EPA wastewater monitoring as part of federally funded grant programs, having been the program designer and submitting author for those and other awarded STEM and educational grants. So, i am not unfamiliar with the beneficial aspects of microbiotic life forms and their importance to all functioning ecosystems and human life.
My Japanese culture experience includes 32 years ago years at rice farms and seaweed farms, and I am very familiar with the 'dirt' to which the common agriculture worker is exposed to in every day life. However, the differentials that I have personally observed include beef ranches in the US Southwest, Hawaiian beef and sheep ranches, and dairy operations in Japan is that the separation between the conditions in the barn and stockyard are more strenuously partitioned in Japan than elsewhere. It's not that I'm unfamiliar with 'muck', but that I was trying to explain that it is actually common and not very much effort at all for a culture, which has a strong tradition of separating their own dining space from the trough in the barn, to do so.
You are certainly free to convey whatever level of dirt you find reasonable into your own dining space, but please, don't feel that a high acceptance of dirt at mealtimes makes for a greater lifespan through immune system effects. The outdoors will provide all the challenge necessary for proper function without it being present inside the house.
But please, don't feel that I think people who wear outdoor shoes into their own kitchens are parasite ridden or otherwise uncouth, that image nor intent was never in any of my explanations of the how and why for Japanese shoe etiquette. Nor should you infer that I am dirt averse in general, only that I prefer not to have it on my own tatami mats or in my own house. The microbiome of the world is essential, but my personal preference is that dirt as well as cats and the rats they chase should remain outside of my own sleeping quarters.
As for fly droppings, the solution to those is to not allow an accumulation of the growing conditions for maggots to persist in close proximity to ones's indoors spaces, and to otherwise keep the screens on doors and windows closed. No flies will resolve to no fly shit, and a fly swatter plus a dilute peroxide\or\bleach dampened cloth will sanitize the mess for when they wander in from somewhere you cannot control, like the barn or an accidentally uncovered compost pile. Again, fly shit outdoors, no problem. On the walls, tables, and inside windows of my own home, nearly fully preventable and absolutely manageable.
I might type long expositions, but am in no way upset by making the choice to do so. Color me mildly dismayed when people have a hard time understanding that other people in other places do things in different ways, without any real difference in effort or loss of time as experienced by those other people, and upon hearing that those different traditions make a certain kind of logic and have a real benefit to those other people, become defensive as if they were being told 'your doing it wrong.' Not upset in the least, bemused and mildly dismayed in a slight measure.
The 'filth will make us stronger' approach reminds me of the historical writings of the 10th-century Arab diplomat Ahmad ibn Fadlan, who chronicled the Volga Vikings (Rus') and was the inspiration for the 'Viking morning bowl' scene from the movie The 13th Warrior.
Just 'Ewww'
Isn't it more that you spoke of "not doing it the Japanese way", and then referenced the comparator I've quoted?
Of what am I to infer, if we start at 'dirty shoes', and then evoked is this image?
While you may not be afraid of dirt, and you've provided context now, don't you think it's reasonable to make assessments, when someone connects my statements of "you're still going to track stuff in" and "a clean looking shoe is just as good as a foot", with the above?
So yes, it's reasonable to think one is over-concerned about cleanliness in such a case. And clearly from your response, you did not mean to evoke that impression.
Fine. No worries.
My comments about clothes and fly droppings, is that in rural environments flies abound. They land on you, and therefore deficate and urinate on you, and your clothes. Such is life. There was another poster worried about animal droppings in tree leaves and the grass, evoking concepts of the whole outside world being covered in animal leavings. Whether intentionally evoked or not, this is another source of my bafflement.
I fully agree that these are two entirely separate things, sentience, intelligence, a lot of other stuff, are all in separate categories.
But I'm pretty sure that the emoters of the world, will very much make sure that AGI has rights and personhood, even if there's no reasonable way to validate that it does.
So it doesn't really matter if AGI is sentient or not, it's going to be treated that way, probably because political parties, and the media and all sorts of people holding up signs, will ensure that it is treated that way, even if they have no idea whether it is or not.
You understood substantially the opposite of what I wrote.
You wrote that «the emoters of the world ... will ensure ... even if they have no idea ... because this is the century of outrage»: I said that they will have an obstacle in the very AGI, because if it is Intelligent it will humble them and shame them.
Unless authoritativeness is restored. Then, it's not "more of the same", but "finally recognized prestigious sources".
And: no, I believe there is a strong lacking, scarcity, and it has to win a lot of noise. Enhancing Intelligence and its availability, and reducing the noise, is necessarily beneficial.
But you are using a simplified model that does not take account e.g. of the virtuous circle given by the extra intelligence available for the population, which will rise at least part of it.
> most humans
I have to repeat it here very often: populations naturally see Paretian distributions, the "most people" issue have has always been there: the difference between virtuous and vicious is whether the role-distribution is healthily regulated or randomic (or even perverse) (if Jack the suave drinker works in reception or as a teacher or in a brewery; if Jackie the corrupt naturalist works as a guide or as a clerk or as a judge). Already help in fixing this makes a world of a difference. Mechanisms that help making decisors taken from the pool of talented decisors make a world of a difference. Extra good judgement injected in the system facilitates that.
> the logic tree
Logic says that the availability of facilitators is intrinsically better. The logic walk says that other factors should be injected to get the proper mechanism running. (It is akin to the democratization of knowledge, from Diderot n D'Alembert to the WWWeb and the chatbots: greatly beneficial for a part of the population, the rest must be helped towards it not to be entangled in the side effects.)
If you ask people to become as children, to give up agency and belief and control to an external entity, you will have absolute rejection.
If you force them to become as children, you will have war.
If you ask most people to listen to any type of machine or even another person, and then follow that advice, while also throwing away their own beliefs, they will laugh and never do that.
The only exception is religion. The only exception is words from a deity. That is the only type of blind obedience humanity will accept. So, do you plan to deify AGI? Do you plan for people to kneel, and bow, and pray to AGI? Because that is the only type of response that will work.
There's an immense, and vast difference between telling somebody truthful information, and telling them what to do with that information.
Truthful information already abounds. It can be found if you look for it. The only difference AGI has is taking that information and providing a context specific output to that knowledge.
I appreciate that you're coming at this from an intellectual angle, but that angle is ignoring reality on the ground. It's ignoring how human beings act and behave, both in groups and individually.
And the difference between knowledge for all, as you cite, and being told how to apply that knowledge is so immense and so vast and such a hit upon the human psyche, that it will not be accepted by the common person.
At best, they will listen to the opinion of the AGI and then turn around and debate it, argue it, and say it's not true if they disagree. They will not reassess their opinions. They will not believe.
This is humanity.
Frankly, while I appreciate why you think it would be nice, at the same time it is also a horrible, dterrible future that you evoke. The concept that a human might walk up to a machine and ask about an important life choice, then throw up his hands and say, well I don't believe this but this machine told me so I'm just gonna do what it says like an automaton, is an end to humanity's agency, future and self-determination. It is an end to all all that makes humanity great.
But you have delirated a large number of assumptions over what I had written - you have "filled in the gaps" with assumptions of your choice without much care for the due diligence of doubt. (One example is the idea - entirely yours - of leaving agency to the machine.) That is a cognitive vice. Education contributes against them. Education passes through teachers. Teachers should be intelligent, wise and proficient. See: if you had the enabling possibility of exchanging with an entity successfully built to those aims, your thought would be cleaner.
Any assumptions you presume I made, are the size of a gnat, compared to the wild and incredible presumption that you have, about AGI. That somehow, it will possess a truth better than ours.
You speak of teachers, and they can be of great value. Yet people who are learners, learn their entire life. I've learned many, many multiples of what any teacher taught me, on my own. And that's really the rub, isn't it?
Teachers serve a purpose, but that purpose ends. A person must learn for themselves, for that is a critical, vital part of thought. Teachers should not be "guiding" people throughout their lives. This is the problem you seemingly do not understand. You've cited that more "teachers", eg AGI, will "help", for people will finally know _the_ _truth_.
Which of course is absurd on its own.
Beyond that, you seem to be in a weird place, where you think that an intelligent being, if made of silicon, or if super smart, will mysteriously then agree with all other beings of the same ilk. AGI #1 and AGI #2 won't agree on everything, why would they? It's weird to think they'd just all agree. So what happens when they do agree? And these throngs of people you think, will sit at the feet of these AGIs, and listen to their holy 'teachings'? Will their followers fight? Seek to destroy the "wrong" AGI?
The problem starts when you think that "external thing" will "set everyone right".
Replacing "judgement" with "truth" is a dangerous bending of what was said.
To possess a better view than that of Average Andy is very, very easy. I have no idea what you mean with «ours».
Your interpretation in «more "teachers", eg AGI, [would] "help", for people will finally know _the_ _truth_» is utterly distorted. You are arbitrarily conflating two different ideas: the instanced Intelligence in "properly implemented Intelligence would authoritatively call BS what is BS" and the general Intelligence that makes people grow when exposed to proper intellectuals.
> if super smart, will mysteriously then agree with all other beings of the same ilk
Yes, assessors with optimal instruments must ideally converge towards a fair assessment.
> external thing
External things do absolutely influence the internal thing.
> set everyone right
I have no idea what made you understand that. Again: you are discussing your own guesses triggered by what I wrote.
You said that people are in aggregate emoters (and would deal with AGI with that tint), and I replied with a grin that if AGI will be achieved it will not use the tints of emoters. You said that people will remain emoters, and I countered that availability of virtue can reduce vice.
Look: maybe a reflection over the «respond to the strongest plausible interpretation» in the guidelines will help you restore the understanding of what you read?
Maybe, as an alternative to your last statement, instead you should consider how absurd your claims are. And pretending that it is wrong for me to make assessments of the outcome, when your position is also based on assessments of an outcome, is a very unmaintainable position to hold.
How about you simply discuss the meat of it, instead of gnawing at the bone? How about, instead of complaining that my assessed outcome, is different than your assessed outcome, with statements akin to "but.. but you keep seeing a different outcome than I do, from my postulated positions!", you just instead discuss those positions?
And my position was, that humans will never, ever, ever take the word of anything as a source of truth. I cited an exception to the rule, religion, where people believe in magical, invisible sky beings.
It should be noted that religion provides one way transfer of knowledge, dogma, but no contact with that diety. This mode of message delivery diefies, and AGI use you describe will not meet this goal. It should also be noted that religious wars, sects, etc happen too.
One primary was the emotional aspect, in decision making, of most humans.
You have merely waved all of this away, attacking not the arguments I've made, but either how I made them, or exuding affront at their source, eg "but I didn't say that!"
Yet the outcome of the path you seek, is not gatekept by the steps you start with, nor the vision you see before you. Instead, it is gatekept by human behaviour.
And my point is you're viewing that behaviour wrong.
Elon Musk is an incredibly intelligent, capable technological mover. He is incredibly effective at driving change and development.
Then he waded into non-tech, non-engineer human behaviour, eg politics of the uneducated masses, thinking "managing this human stuff will be easy"
Was he right?
Or did he he fall flat on his face, misunderstanding how emoting humans react? Behave?
Unless your aspirations and models for how humans will react to AGI, include that emotional aspect, you're going to remain wildly off base.
I have no relevance to defending positions that I do not hold. You seem to have stepped from the analytical to the synthetic, and construed ideas that I have never proposed. You should go back to the analytical and formulate explicit statements that you have identified as targets. (If we had the time and space - here, it is probably not the case.)
> humans [] never, ever, ever take the word of anything as a source of truth
Actually some humans recognize some sources as more reliable and worth listening to than other sources.
> the emotional aspect, in decision making, of most humans
So? Yes, the thing was noted, and reiterated in this very exchange: «populations naturally see Paretian distributions, the "most people" issue have has always been there». Given that I know, link that statement to actual positions of mine.
> Unless your aspirations and models for how humans will react to AGI, include that emotional aspect, you're going to remain wildly off base
Proper education dries up that swamp and the bestial habit to sink in it. If we achieved AGI, that would become a facilitator in education.
But look - since it is not my job to plan structural societal AGI implementation for the education of the masses, I am not obliged to define the details on how to circumvent the tendency of emoters around and against proper use of resources... Surely details get more complex in systemic planning - but I do not have that planning in my agenda.
Profit is a weird metric, in that one can defer necessary expenditure to show increases in it, while having negative profit was a good signal for Amazon as they invested all that money.
The labs are not really in the same position though, as their major capital expenditure is training models, which keeps getting more expensive and they can't stop as the frontier keeps moving.
no profit is very different from running at extreme loss, as an example. A company can be eternally stable with zero profit, while another very profitable vultur capitalist company will eventually run out of companies to gut for good looking on paper flow. In the same way, is the current valuation and i come based on a real good or service delivered that people genuinly are happy to pay for at tge rates current valuations indicate? Clearly that's a no, so, problem.
Story I heard, was that Hyundai hired away many high-end QA people from Toyota, and because there's no intellectual property treaties between Korea and Japan, there's really nothing Toyota could do about it.
They apparently even took plans, detailed documentation, endless amounts of information to Hyundai. I'm not sure of the veracity of that information, but it sure explains how Hyundai became incredibly good, literally overnight.
I've seen courts grant an exception from a license suspension, for normal (but a suspendable amount of) citations such as speeding or something of that ilk.
Those drivers licenses have special wording on them, that indicate the person may only drive to and from work, and often has the address the person has to drive to and from.
However I've also seen contractors allowed to drive to and from job sites, and directly home.
This is in a province of Canada, and dangerous driving or alcohol use, would invalidate that ability to get an exception.
This driver with the Waymo sounds like dangerous driving.
Unclear if in this US State the situation is similar.
reply